Symbolism is not a right-wing value

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


A common right-wing criticism of Cindy Sheehan is that she doesn’t really want to ask Bush a question, she doesn’t really want to see him–she’s just there to put on a “staged” event, to call attention to her cause, and to get media coverage.

Well, a double-layered “duh” to that. Of course she is there to call attention to her cause and to get media coverage. Oh my god–someone is using symbolism to make a point. What a concept. What will we tell the children?

It’s not like Bush has held dozens of staged “meetings” where only supporters were not at risk of being hauled away by the police. But if conservatives really are that literal, I guess it’s up to me to set them straight.

I hate to break it to all of you Republicans, but when Pat Peale wore that Band-Aid on her face at your convention, she hadn’t cut herself on the barbed wire while she was clearing brush: She was using it as a symbol to mock a man who put his life in danger to fight in Vietnam.

When Bush served a platter of plastic Turkey to the soldiers in Iraq, he wasn’t auditioning to be a food stylist for the House and Garden channel: He was promoting good will among those whom he sent to be killed for PNAC and Halliburton.

The Mission Accomplished sign didn’t mean that the war was over–just that the White House wanted you to have a big old testosterone charge from all that killing and destruction.

And when Bush stuffed a pair of gym socks into his flight uniform, it didn’t mean he was looking to co-host with Adriano Rio–it was just a ploy to create another splash of testosterone.

Getting back to Cindy Sheehan–it is a moot point. Bush will do anything–even leave his ranch for Idaho–to avoid facing her. A vacation from his vacation. That’s a lot of vacating. Because it’s hard work, being a liar.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest